← More Recent Successes success stories

Client found not guilty of Sexual Assault and Forcible Confinement after four-day trial, Ontario Court of Justice, Brampton. M.M. attended late on a Friday night his cousin’s home. Many of his family members lived there and there was a tenant in the basement who he met when he arrived. She started talking to him and learned a lot about his relationship with the family that owned the home; that they ran their own trucking business, and he was from a nearby town where both M.M. and the tenant was from. They decided to chat and drink some alcoholic drinks. Over two and half hours, they became a bit intoxicated and were playing games on his phone and having fun. Eventually, the two wound up in a bedroom and were play wresting. Eventually they went to her bedroom, and they had sexual intimacy. They fell asleep after and a few hours later, he woke up and they started to talk about him seeing her again that weekend. M.M. told her that he was married. She freaked out and started accusing him of lying to her and taking advantage of her. He apologized and left. A few hours later, she called police, and he was charged with sexual assault. Joseph Neuberger of Neuberger & Partners LLP was retained to defend the sex assault charge. Diana Davison was part of the defence team. At trial, the complainant was cross-examined on the sequence of events. The complaint significantly downplayed any interest in M.M. and even denied that she enjoyed talking to him, despite sitting and talking with him for over two hours. The complainant alleged that H.H. had held her down and forcibly removed her hoodie, top, and other clothing items while he continued to hold her with considerable force pinning her to the bed. After forced sex, he was alleged to have held her tight, keeping control of her cell phone, and only released her when he woke up at 7:30 a.m. Cross-examination focused on the mechanics of the activity including the removal of the clothing, sequence of other events including my client leaving the room to get her medication for a headache, and how she knew the time when they woke up. Cross-examination yielded several material inconsistencies and admissions, including that she knew the time because her cell phone was placed beside her on the bed and when she woke up she looked at her phone to know the time. Thus, there were several admissions that seriously undermined her credibility. Further, Joseph Neuberger cross-examined on the defence narrative including that the complainant was very familiar with a concept in India of rape by deception, and that she felt deceived by M.M. because he said nothing about being married until the morning. The client testified and gave a detailed account of the events of the night including about consent. Joseph Neuberger provided written submissions to the court in addition to oral submissions to ensure that all issues were properly covered. The Court found that there was a credible motive to fabricate, and M.M. was found not guilty of sex assault and forcible confinement.